|
by Steven D
After listening to the speech President Obama gave at Ft. Hood on on You Tube (part 1, part 2 and part 3) I was impressed by his dignity and grace. The speech was a good one, not great, but his demeanor was all you could expect from a Commander-in-Chief addressing the troops and the Nation after such a tragedy.
Sadly, not everyone agrees with my assessment. First up the Wall Street Journal. Their headline sort of tells you all you need to know about what they thought of him today:
Obama Delivers Largely Unemotional Speech at Fort Hood On to Pajamas Media, who doesn't believe Obama hates terrorists enough:
America, the West, and Israel are all fighting back in a war that radical, jihadic Islamists, (not Muslims) have declared against us. [...> Yeah, not enough about the War ion Terror in the speech, was there? Not enough about "Bring 'em on" and "Dead or Alive!" In other words he wasn't the Warmonger-in-Chief like W used to be. It goes downhill from there ... Here's a commenter at Breitbart.com who thinks the family members of the murdered soldiers should blame Obama for what happened at Ft. Hood and refuse to shake his hand because he refused to call the Ft. Hood tragedy the "radical act of a Muslim" and that he was more concerned about Major Hasan's mental health than about the people who died. No, really.
This is going to be pretty harsh, but I think it is important to address this overlooked truth. If I were a family member, I would decline to shake hands with Barack Obama and I would say the following: Yes, that was harsh. But maybe not as harsh as this bitter little soul. Take a look:
It’s been 5 days since the shootings at Fort Hood, Texas. They have had numerous memorial services in addition to a big one on Sunday in a stadium on Fort Hood. So, another memorial service has been scheduled for today and Obama is going to attend. Why did Obama wait so long to decide to go to Fort Hood? Is this just another photo op for him like the "concerned President saluting the fallen soldiers at Dover"? I love that last part, about Bush wanting to keep his visit quiet. Wonder how everybody found out about it? It's a mystery, I guess. Just like its so gawdawful that Obama waited five days to allow the families to grieve on their own and prepare for a proper visit by the POTUS, not a sneak in the night visit. As I recall the day the massacre happened he said that he would allow the Army and the families time to prepare for a Memorial service he would attend. Because preparations to have all the families flown in to Killeen, Texas, provide security for the attendees and the soldiers on base, and provide a private space where he could meet with the survivors and the families just might take some time to organize properly. Bush probably would have done a flyover and waved from 30,000 feet high, like he did after Katrina. No, what am I thinking? He would have dressed up in one of his pseudo-military uniforms and been there the next day screaming for "Death to Al Qaeda!" (but not his friends and business partners in Saudi Arabia, of course). And his speech would have been in Prime Time, not in TV's mid-day waste land. Hell, one think Bush did well was photo ops. Remember the Bullhorn standing on the Pile of Rubble at the WTC site hanging onto a Fireman like his life depended on it?
Yeah, that was so much better, wasn't it? Bush was much more dignified and all that jazz. Too bad were stuck with this Obama guy now, eh? What a damn shame for all the "Real Americans" (whoever they may be).
now, eh?
Obama's Speaks; Wingnuts Attack | 9 comments (9 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)
Obama's Speaks; Wingnuts Attack | 9 comments (9 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)
|
Login
We listened to PEN American Center's "State of Emergency" and found 1940s books by Curzio Malaparte only at Alibris
|
|||||||||
Booman Tribune Homepage admin@boomantribune.com powered by Scoop
More blogs about Blogs at Technorati.
|
|||||||||||
© 2009 Booman Tribune